Getting a Plan Together

[Daniel Stone]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

To All Members of the Texas Team,

Dear Texas Team members,

Getting a plan together that works is sometimes hard to achieve. When
someone reject the new ideas or plans because it is not business as
usual is very common. When changes come and no one is the wiser on the
change then nothing but chaos can occur.

The meeting at UDS did happen with a very short notice. Some who may
have had great input into the overall idea and decision may feel they
were left out.

The fact of the matter is this mailing list is getting opinions for and
against the argument.

I believe that obstacles  do exist to forming the Texas Team but they
are just that hurdles we must overcome and decisions that need to be
hashed out.

We all have our own view on the subject. We need to work together so we
as a team can form a unified voice. If some ideas are better or worse
than others we can only see if discussion is open as well as minds.

Your opinion is just as important as anyone who was in the meeting at
UDS. You must let others know what you may or may not like about the
issue at hand.

My thinking is that a few feel that they are having this shoved down
their throat. Just like with any bad taste we get we reject it.

Let us start off on a new journey together. Some plans take more time
that others and my belief is that UDS was a great start. But as a whole
, a state, voice we must come to one plan of attack.

Again:
I would like to cordially invite anyone to attend a meeting in Arlington
this is going to be one of the topics discussed. I will also be
discussing current projects that others and myself are involved in.

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1336262

You can register your attendance either in person or from remote here
https://edge.launchpad.net/sprints/uta-1nuet/+attend

Thank you for your time. I look forward to watching and helping this
team grow.

Cordially,


Daniel Stone


> Hello there.  As I said at the meeting, I've only gotten connected with you 
> folks (beyond occasionally reading the mailing list postings) within the last 
> day or so.  And although I spoke a little at the meeting, I'm pretty much 
> still in lurker mode.  But, since you asked for it  :-D , here are a few 
> thoughts that I've had given what little I know about what is going on.
> 
> First, it has been brought up that Texas is an awfully big state.  In fact, as 
> a state it is larger than the entire country of France.  And our population 
> centers aren't clustered in one spot.  Dallas.  Houston.  El Paso.  Austin.  
> All in different spots, and in the case of Houston v. El Paso, a helluva long 
> distance apart.  Now then, it has been said that a lot of the discussion of a 
> state LoCo has been prompted by the higher up's in Ubuntu's food chain who 
> want LoCo's organized by state.  Some of these folks may not fathom how large 
> Texas actually is, and honestly the idea strikes me as something akin to 
> creating a Europe LoCo.
> 
> I am not saying that we shouldn't have a Texas LoCo.  Nor am I saying we 
> should.  What I am saying, is that logistics might be a nightmare at times, 
> especially when it comes to physical movement, meetings, etc. on a state 
> level.  If it's decided to hold a Texas meeting in Houston, that will put 
> folks in El Paso, and really even in Dallas, in a bit of a lurch.  Even a 
> meeting in Austin (which is pretty much the organization in the middle) would 
> be rough for many to make it to.  If folks started to feel as if they can 
> never make state-level meetings because of the distance, they may begin 
> feeling disenfranchised, followed close behind by much drama, crying and 
> gnashing of teeth.
> 
> Given this, it was mentioned that perhaps we should thumb our noses at the 
> organizers and just do it our own way.  I don't think it needs to come to 
> that.  But I do think that we need to try to explain to them the situation.  
> El Paso is only *40* miles closer to Houston than it is to Los Angeles.  
> Although Texas isn't a "national" entity, it would need to be treated as such.
> 
> I'll sum it up again by saying that yes, perhaps a Texas LoCo is a good idea.  
> But it would through necessity be run -- and perhaps even recognized -- as 
> damn near a national LoCo.
> 
> Finally, one other thing that I've learned from experience, because what I've 
> seen so far is giving me a few flashbacks.  I can't help but notice a lot of 
> tension building over the issue, and although we all have emotions and 
> positions, everyone on both sides of the fence really need to continue to keep 
> their cool, stating their positions passionately but respectfully.  One of the 
> big dangers would be creating a Texas Implosion instead of a Texas LoCo.
> 
> "Dude.  I think we just blew Texas up."
> "Dude.  Who was wearing those smokin' pink boots?"
> 
> That would not be a cool conversation to take place at Canonical.   :-D   
> Seriously, though, we should keep the discussion up, and keep our bearings.  I 
> really think there are strengths and weaknesses with either a Texas or 
> regional LoCo's, and what those are will become evident with time and 
> discussion.
> 
> -- Travis, a.k.a., Muffinx.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAksTdvEACgkQEAs1CUzJqEP0TwCgrhLUx644CWXD2Yg7+Xhn/3P6
Y9AAnj/lF3AHwkWHqNqwz359othh9TI5
=jQ89
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----